Whose Music Is It Anyway? OpenAI vs. Music Labels Sparks Copyright Debate
As artificial intelligence reshapes creative industries, the Indian music scene has entered the legal spotlight. With top labels like T-Series, Saregama, and Sony Music India challenging OpenAI in court, a critical question looms: Can AI ethically use copyrighted music to train its models without authorization?
This high-stakes case isn’t just about one company—it’s about how copyright law, AI, and creativity collide in a digital-first world.
🎵 Creativity vs. Code: The Human Element in Music
French composer Olivier Messiaen wrote his iconic Quartet for the End of Time inside a Nazi concentration camp, armed with only a scrap of paper and three fellow inmates playing cello, violin, and clarinet. His work is a reminder of the emotional, human core that defines music.
Today, AI can generate full compositions with a few prompts—but can it ever replicate that essence?
As AI becomes increasingly capable of producing music, many artists and legal experts are raising a red flag about how these systems are trained, and what that means for the future of human-made art.
🎧 The Lawsuit: Indian Music Labels Take a Stand
In early 2025, Indian labels under the Indian Music Industry (IMI) association joined a copyright infringement suit against OpenAI, alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted music for AI training. This followed a 2024 case filed by ANI, a leading news agency, claiming their content was similarly misused.
The central issue? Whether AI companies like OpenAI can scrape copyrighted audio and lyrics from the web without proper licensing—and whether India’s existing copyright laws are equipped to handle this new era.
OpenAI, meanwhile, argues that it uses “publicly available data” and invokes “fair use.” However, legal experts caution that India’s fair use exemptions are limited and specific—typically meant for criticism, commentary, or education—not commercial AI training.
🏛️ Jurisdiction & the Global Precedent
OpenAI claims Indian courts have no jurisdiction since it's a US-based firm. However, advocates argue that OpenAI’s large user base in India and local operations make it subject to Indian law. Legal experts also highlight that OpenAI’s shift from a nonprofit to a $157 billion for-profit entity adds another layer of complexity.
“Training outputs may directly compete with original works,” notes Kartik Dey, a Supreme Court patent attorney. “That could undercut the original market—making the fair use defense weak.”
🌍 The Global Context: It’s Not Just India
Similar lawsuits are surfacing worldwide:
-
In Germany, GEMA (a collective for composers and publishers) has sued OpenAI for the use of song lyrics.
-
In the U.S., Universal Music Group demanded platforms take down “Heart on My Sleeve,” an AI-generated track mimicking Drake and The Weeknd, which went viral before being removed.
-
In late 2024, over 400 Hollywood creators petitioned the U.S. government to safeguard existing copyright protections against AI misuse.
These cases highlight a growing unease: AI firms are using copyrighted works to train profitable models—often without credit or compensation.
⚖️ Legal Grey Zones: Who Owns AI-Generated Music?
Currently, there is no universal licensing framework for using copyrighted music in AI training. This leaves creators vulnerable, with unclear ownership of AI-generated works.
“Unless new laws emerge,” says Shanit Ghose, founder of AI music tool Sur, “we could see artists’ styles being replicated and monetized without their permission.”
Legal remedies could include:
-
Forcing AI firms to delete unlicensed training content
-
Imposing royalties or licensing models
-
Awarding damages for copyright infringement
-
Introducing transparency requirements on training data
🎙️ Artists Speak Out: Protecting the Soul of Music
Indie-folk musician and lawyer Shourya Malhotra captures the emotional crux of the issue:
“I draw the line when a song is used to train an algorithm. If I’m inspired by music, it’s something I’ve paid for—so why should it be free for AI?”
Jaspreet Bindra, CEO of AI&Beyond, adds:
“Music is emotion, improvisation, and personal narrative—things AI still can’t replicate. We need to balance AI innovation with human creativity.”
🔍 What’s Next? The Call for Change
Legal experts are pushing for:
-
AI-specific licensing models
-
Transparent use disclosures
-
Revenue-sharing frameworks that ensure artists get paid
Advocate Srish Mishra suggests treating AI models intended for public interest differently from those built for profit, with lighter licensing for the former and stricter regulation for the latter.
As AI companies rapidly evolve, so must the law—otherwise, we risk losing the very thing that makes music magical: its human soul.
✨ Final Note
This case could set a global precedent. Whether the courts side with OpenAI or the music labels, it will force a much-needed dialogue around AI, copyright, and the future of creativity.
.png)
0 Comments